[linux-cifs-client] Re: mounting from a server with DNS-based, load balancing

[Bill Gunter]

It could very well be that the server is rejecting the connections for
the reason you mention. My main question is whether this behavior is
normal (i.e. it's the way CIFS is supposed to work) or if the netapp
is not handling things correctly. Since the cifs client matches on IP
is there a way to force it to use the same session? If not, then my
solution would be to twiddle with the netapp, I guess.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Steve French (smfltc)
<smfltc at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> I am having trouble mounting shares from a netapp filer that has two
>> interfaces and one hostname. If I rely on the round-robin DNS
>> resolution in the mounts, about half of the shares mount the first
>> time I try them. After another couple of tries I can get all the
>> shares to mount. If I set the IP in /etc/hosts on the client all the
>> shares mount fine. Debug messages point to a problem with mounting
>> shares with a different server IP. It looks like cifs doesn't the IP
>> to change, and after the first mount from a server subsequent mounts
>> of different shares from the same server have to use the same IP
>> address as the first mount.
>
> The cifs kernel client matches on ip address (the host name resolution is
> done in mount.cifs before it calls the kernel).  What you are probably
> seeing is that 1/2 of the mounts attempt to setup a new session (rather than
> using the existing smb session, as it would if it detected that the ip
> address is the same).   Are you sure that the server is not rejecting the
> session setups to the 2nd ip address (because it sees the connection which
> exists to the first and mistakenly thinks this is an error).
>



-- 
Bill Gunter
tulanian at gmail.com
http://irishyear.blogspot.com

"I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not
merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed
consummation." Reflections on the Psalms, C.S. Lewis


Spread Firefox!
http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=22494&t=1